A new financial analysis predicts that Apple's yet-to-be-announced tablet will launch in early 2010 and sell about 2 million units in its first year -- and at an estimated $600 each, that would be an additional $1.2 billion in revenue.

The report, from market research firm Piper Jaffray, states that potential revenue from such a device has not yet been included in forecast models for Apple on Wall Street. The firm predicts that the product would increase the company's overall revenue by 3 percent in 2010.

"While at first glance this may appear to address a niche market, we believe the addressable market is larger than that of the Apple TV, of which Apple sold about 1.2m in its first year," the report states.

Piper Jaffray analysts also shared inside information that further suggests that the tablet will launch in early 2010. That reaffirms claims made by AppleInsider's own sources.

"Last week we spoke with an Asian component supplier that has received orders from Apple for a touch-screen device to be fulfilled by late CY09," the report reads. "This data point underscores our thesis that a tablet will likely launch in early CY10."

The firm sees a tablet filling a void between the iPod touch and low-end MacBook. While the product will not be a netbook and will not be marketed as a netbook, Senior Research Analyst Gene Munster believes the product would be geared towards users who want convenient, inexpensive computers for simple tasks like Web browsing and checking e-mail.

We believe an Apple tablet would be priced 30%-50% below the $999 MacBook, and would offer best in class web, email, and media software," the report reads. "In other words, we believe Apple's tablet would compete well in the netbook category even though it would not be a netbook."

Munster also speculates that the device will run a version of the iPhone OS and have access to the App Store. The larger screen could also allow for multitasking, which is not currently available on the iPhone. He believes this is more likely than Apple making OS X "touch friendly."

"Apple could choose to simply run the current App Store apps on the larger device, with enough usable space for multiple apps to run (multi-tasking)," the report states. "Key apps, like Safari and Mail, could be made larger to make use of the larger screen resolution, making Apple's tablet appealing for more extended use, and the company could continue to leverage its primary asset in mobile computing, the App Store, in this scenario. We believe this is the most likely scenario given the success of the multi-touch platform and the App Store ecosystem, which could be accelerated with a tablet device."

While the supposed Apple tablet has been expected for years, in recent weeks the amount of news on the device has reached a fever pitch. Earlier this week, another Wall Street analysis firm, Kaufman Bros., revealed that Apple had investigated screen sizes ranging from 4 inches to 12 inches for its tablet. And last month, a Chinese newspaper reported that Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. could begin assembling tablets as soon as September.

A new financial analysis predicts that Apple's yet-to-be-announced tablet will launch in early 2010 and sell about 2 million units in its first year -- and at an estimated $600 each, that would be an additional $1.2 billion in revenue.

I call BS on that price. My 1st gen iPhone cost $600. I really wish these reports would stop trying so hard to set people up for disappointment.

"Munster also speculates that the device will run a version of the iPhone OS [...] The larger screen could also allow for multitasking, which is not currently available on the iPhone. He believes this is more likely than Apple making OS X 'touch friendly.'"

What? Screen size had little to nothing to do with the iPhone OS not allowing multitasking on 3rd party apps -- and, as has been covered here and elsewhere a million times, multitasking is already present in the Mail and SMS apps on the iPhone. It's all about battery life.

A bigger device can hold a bigger battery, and would also likely be designed for a setting where frequent charging wouldn't be a deal-breaker as it is with a phone (i.e., home/office, where there are presumably lots of outlets, maybe room for a cradle).

That's why multitasking would be present, not screen size.

Never mind that the iPhone OS *is* a "touch friendly" version of OS X, so the last part of the quote doesn't make much sense. They could just enable more pieces of OS X on a new device, apropos of whatever it's supposed to do, whether it uses the iPhone UI or not.

I disagree that it would be easier to enhance the iPhone OS than to make OS X more "touch friendly". I have had the opportunity to play around with one of the touch screen ModBooks, and it handles OS X via touch screen with relative ease -- and that's from a third party vendor. Photoshop was even pressure sensitive for tablet drawing. Clearly Piper Jaffray hasn't done all of the homework they can there. I'd put money on this thing running Snow Leopard.

I call BS on that price. My 1st gen iPhone cost $600. I really wish these reports would stop trying so hard to set people up for disappointment.

You don't really believe that that iPhone was worth $600 do you? Not in value to you but in costs and reasonable profits. Even now Apples margins on iPhone are huge.

The out the door price has a lot to do with marketing. Generally the cost to produce the product has little to do with it's selling price. If we are talking an ARM based device most of the cost in the electronics is in the flash memory with the display likely equalling the Flash memory cost. That depends of course upon how much flash goes into the device and here I'm hoping two different capacity models.

In any event I'm really hoping this is the type of device that I imagine it to be. I might go for rev A especially if it is supplied with the CPU and GPU power needed in rev A. The only nasty with my iPhone is it's lack of suitable CPU. This tablet simply has to perform a lot better. The new iPhone GS indicates that this shouldn't be a problem. Still the thing better be dual core at the very least.

I'm actually excited but at the same time I'm hoping it isn't tied to AT&T. I'm also hoping it has just a bit more user I/O ports. SD and USB if you know what I mean.

Price is the key. Tablets won't be people's primary computer. Instead they will be an auxiliary computer used for specific tasks. With this in mind, price is the key. Tablets will only become popular when they are so cheap that people can buy them on whim. A "why not?" kind of purchase. Otherwise, it will only be the rich that equip themselves with an auxiliary/limited-use computer.

$600 is close but not quite cheap enough in my book. At that price, most people will continue to use their laptop or desktop. With that said, I would love an Apple tablet. I probably can't justify the purchase of one though, even at the $600 price. My 24" iMac already does everything I need so a tablet would fall into the luxury category for me.

They'll sell like hotcakes for sure!!! Or maybe not
Pricepoint will be sub-800!! Then again it could be higher.. or lower
At least one thing is certain, they'll make everyone's dream gadget come to life!! Wait, how is that even possible

They'll sell like hotcakes for sure!!! Or maybe not
Pricepoint will be sub-800!! Then again it could be higher.. or lower
At least one thing is certain, they'll make everyone's dream gadget come to life!! Wait, how is that even possible

Gotta love the analysts

I'd say the number one gadget with potential now is the Apple TV.

People are hugely interested in being able to watch anything they want, whenever they want, instantaneously on their home TV, and to do so without any hassle. Given how much people spend on cable TV subscriptions, they would certainly plop down a ton of money of an Apple TV type device that actually delivered on those promises. The software and media licensing deals just aren't there yet though.

Tablets are appealing because they are rare and have the mystique of being a rare high-tech gadget. As for the masses lusting after them... not so much.

Price is the key. Tablets won't be people's primary computer. Instead they will be an auxiliary computer used for specific tasks. With this in mind, price is the key. Tablets will only become popular when they are so cheap that people can buy them on whim. A "why not?" kind of purchase. Otherwise, it will only be the rich that equip themselves with an auxiliary/limited-use computer.

$600 is close but not quite cheap enough in my book. At that price, most people will continue to use their laptop or desktop. With that said, I would love an Apple tablet. I probably can't justify the purchase of one though, even at the $600 price. My 24" iMac already does everything I need so a tablet would fall into the luxury category for me.

How does that 24" iMac fit on the table at the coffee shop? I think your missing something here.

There are too many "whys" for me in the Piper Jaffray analysis such as:

Why has this thing been in development for so long if it's basically a large touch ? Using Iphone OS. They could have released that already.

Why just create a large touch that competes against the ipod touch.

Why use iphone OS when OSX snow Leopard has so many touch functions beyond what is used
for current mac laptops ( everyone I think agrees that touch on laptop screens or desktop systems is a little awkward so what are these functions in OSX for ?)

the jungle drum beats and getting louder and louder and
faster and faster .
the sweat drenched swirling spinning dancers
circling the ever growing fire
start to lose all control
and yet everything speeds up even more
the jungle drum beats were pounding our chests

They'll sell like hotcakes for sure!!! Or maybe not
Pricepoint will be sub-800!! Then again it could be higher.. or lower
At least one thing is certain, they'll make everyone's dream gadget come to life!! Wait, how is that even possible

Gotta love the analysts

+1. As a student, although I am quite rich but I feel that Apple is like a luxury brand. So nothing cheap comes out of them. In my country here, you can buy 2 HTC Touch Diamond2 s with the price of a 32GB 3GS on contract. That shows quality and worth of Apple products.

People are hugely interested in being able to watch anything they want, whenever they want, instantaneously on their home TV, and to do so without any hassle. Given how much people spend on cable TV subscriptions, they would certainly plop down a ton of money of an Apple TV type device that actually delivered on those promises. The software and media licensing deals just aren't there yet though.

Tablets are appealing because they are rare and have the mystique of being a rare high-tech gadget. As for the masses lusting after them... not so much.

Absolutely right! I was a 1st gen purchaser of the Apple TV and love the little device. I'd love it more if it was able to grab more media assets from the web and play them through my HDTV. And I'm not talking about adding codecs to play the pirated material our in the wild rather allow Hulu, NetFlix, etc. to play back with Apple's UI ease.

You don't really believe that that iPhone was worth $600 do you? Not in value to you but in costs and reasonable profits. Even now Apples margins on iPhone are huge.

The out the door price has a lot to do with marketing. Generally the cost to produce the product has little to do with it's selling price. If we are talking an ARM based device most of the cost in the electronics is in the flash memory with the display likely equalling the Flash memory cost. That depends of course upon how much flash goes into the device and here I'm hoping two different capacity models.

In any event I'm really hoping this is the type of device that I imagine it to be. I might go for rev A especially if it is supplied with the CPU and GPU power needed in rev A. The only nasty with my iPhone is it's lack of suitable CPU. This tablet simply has to perform a lot better. The new iPhone GS indicates that this shouldn't be a problem. Still the thing better be dual core at the very least.

I'm actually excited but at the same time I'm hoping it isn't tied to AT&T. I'm also hoping it has just a bit more user I/O ports. SD and USB if you know what I mean.

Dave

WELL dave from 2001 movie
the sony bookreader sells for 299
which makes the iphone cheap

I'm still not sure of the purpose of this device, in relation to when or how it is used. If it is specialized, like a typical tablet, meaning for doctors and such, I can see that working, but on a limited basis. But if this is to be something that everyone just carries around with them, 10" seems a bit big.

Right now my iPhone is the perfect size to carry everywhere. It fits in the pocket of a pair of cargo shorts or even jeans. I don't have to remove it from my pockets to sit down or get in the car or anything. In other words an iPhone is very convenient to carry everywhere with you while still being big enough to be functional. What do you do with this 10" thing and where do you put it (...that's what SHE said...) if you take it everywhere with you? Or is something in between? Something that you take with you on certain occasions, like on an airplane or something.

What? Screen size had little to nothing to do with the iPhone OS not allowing multitasking on 3rd party apps -- and, as has been covered here and elsewhere a million times, multitasking is already present in the Mail and SMS apps on the iPhone. It's all about battery life.

While the comment was poorly written I believe his point is that the larger screen allows for the interface elements to make multitasking more user friendly and obvious. I can actually see Snow Leopards new Dock/Exposé feature being an important element in delivering user friendly multitasking on the platform.

So yeah poorly written. I can see Apple still enforcing the idea that each user app owns the screen with the Dock as the avenue between running apps. For small screens this should really work well.

Quote:

A bigger device can hold a bigger battery, and would also likely be designed for a setting where frequent charging wouldn't be a deal-breaker as it is with a phone (i.e., home/office, where there are presumably lots of outlets, maybe room for a cradle).

A bigger battery would be huge here, but lower power electronics even bigger. There is already a lower power version of iPhones processor out so this is realistic. Of course the tablet will make up for that by running the processor faster and likely with more cores. The point being we could have a dramatically faster tablet that doesn't use much more power than the current iPhone. Slap a bigger battery in there and we should get good run times.

By the way frequent charging is a bit of a deal breaker, it is not acceptable in fact. Ideally the unit would handle 4 hours of continous file transfer over the Cell network and at least twelve over the WiFi network. Even 4 hours is a bit thin for cellular networking but I'm talking continous file transfers here. This should be easy though as there is plenty of space for a battery in a tablet of this size.

Quote:

That's why multitasking would be present, not screen size.

Actually this I disagree with. Multitasking should be present because Apple realizes that users need it. Frankly it should be incorporated into iPhone at this point. The arguements about battery run times are meaningless as the user should have a clean interface to what is and isn't running.

It is like driving a car, you have a choice to go fast or slow and thus burn gas a the rate of your choosing. The big problem on the original iPhones is the lack of RAM to really support user multitasking but that isn't an issue anymore.

Quote:

Never mind that the iPhone OS *is* a "touch friendly" version of OS X, so the last part of the quote doesn't make much sense. They could just enable more pieces of OS X on a new device, apropos of whatever it's supposed to do, whether it uses the iPhone UI or not.

Yep! It is rather sad that an analyst would not grasp this. More importantly building on iPhone OS keeps the APIs trim and fresh. Mac OS/X has a lot of cruft in it that would add nothing to the device.

These financial analytists not only know what new products are coming out with what features, they also know the cost of them?

Appleinsider quick, sign them up to write for you!

Really. EVERYTHING is speculation. And very questionable.

They're selling unlocked iPhone's for similar pricing, so anythign new and innovative, Apple's gonna charge more than $600, easy... and that's IF they can even guess what the device is? I know there must be some way to kinda guess that there's a new product based on screen orders, etc., but with Apple's tight lipped environment everything seems almost not worth talking about until it's announced.

I'm still not sure of the purpose of this device, in relation to when or how it is used. If it is specialized, like a typical tablet, meaning for doctors and such, I can see that working, but on a limited basis. But if this is to be something that everyone just carries around with them, 10" seems a bit big.

Right now my iPhone is the perfect size to carry everywhere. It fits in the pocket of a pair of cargo shorts or even jeans. I don't have to remove it from my pockets to sit down or get in the car or anything. In other words an iPhone is very convenient to carry everywhere with you while still being big enough to be functional. What do you do with this 10" thing and where do you put it (...that's what SHE said...) if you take it everywhere with you? Or is something in between? Something that you take with you on certain occasions, like on an airplane or something.

$2000 for car DVD system
$2000 for navigation

$600 for itablet and you don't have to take a stack of DVD's along with you to keep the kids entertained

Price is the key. Tablets won't be people's primary computer. Instead they will be an auxiliary computer used for specific tasks. With this in mind, price is the key. Tablets will only become popular when they are so cheap that people can buy them on whim. A "why not?" kind of purchase. Otherwise, it will only be the rich that equip themselves with an auxiliary/limited-use computer.

$600 is close but not quite cheap enough in my book. At that price, most people will continue to use their laptop or desktop. With that said, I would love an Apple tablet. I probably can't justify the purchase of one though, even at the $600 price. My 24" iMac already does everything I need so a tablet would fall into the luxury category for me.

Indeed, any purported tablet would have to do a lot more than just use full screen for email, to make it a desirable product.

It's been clear for a while now that any tablet will have to run either "iPhone OS-X", (or some variant of it), instead of "Mac OS-X." Its also pretty clear that unless this thing can handle document creation it will basically be just a bigger iPod and not worthy of the tablet moniker at all. The key to that is applications.

For that reason the thing that would confirm the tablet for me, would be some kind of a leak or rumour about mobile versions of Pages, Numbers and Keynote. IMO it would be absolutely necessary for these to already exist in some lab somewhere, in order for a tablet to be a viable proposition.

Another thing that makes no sense however, is that if a tablet exists and it *isn't* just a bigger iPod, then that whole deal where they "split" OS-X (remember the two bridges?), and called one "Mac OS-X" and the other "iPhone OS-X" looks pretty stupid now. At the time I thought "iPhone OS-X" was just a cumbersome choice of words, but it makes even less sense with a tablet in the picture.

What are they going to do, have an invite with *three* bridges on it this time? Or rename it yet again so soon after re-naming it the first time?

In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...

$600 for itablet and you don't have to take a stack of DVD's along with you to keep the kids entertained

So are you saying that you keep it in the car and remove it maybe only to sync up with a Mac? Possible, but when in the car, where do you put it? Could it take the heat/cold of being in the car all the time? If you don't keep it in the car all the time, how many times will you forget it after you're already in the car?

Sorry to hear that but you seem to be very confused as to what iPhone OS is.

Quote:

I really am not interested in a larger version of the iPhone - the iPhone works just fine for what I need.

This is really ignorant, you can't equate the device with the OS. It is like saying you would never buy a Mac Book because your Mac Pro is a better machine. They are different devices running the same OS.

Like wise it is doubtful that the tablet will have phone functionality. It's an entirely different device and may have features foriegn to iPhone. Look at iPhone and just imagine that all of the features and apps where not limited by screen size or CPU power.

Quote:

However, a 10 inch machine that I could do some email and light word-processing on that would sync easily with my other desktop and laptop - that would be great.

Now do me a favor, Please re read the above until you realize that you just described a device running iPhone OS! This is what amazes me about people dissing iPhone OS, they swear it is unacceptable and then go on to describe a device that might as well be iPhone OS.

Quote:

Hopefully I won't have to create a hackintosh in order to get this.

You will not be creating any hackintishes for this device because it is going to be difficult to duplicate the device. In any event you gave clearly indicated that you have in mind a device of a different genre than this tablet. I don't know why either as you clearly want an iPhone OS tablet but just don't realize it.

Sorry to hear that but you seem to be very confused as to what iPhone OS is.

This is really ignorant, you can't equate the device with the OS. It is like saying you would never buy a Mac Book because your Mac Pro is a better machine. They are different devices running the same OS.

Like wise it is doubtful that the tablet will have phone functionality. It's an entirely different device and may have features foriegn to iPhone. Look at iPhone and just imagine that all of the features and apps where not limited by screen size or CPU power.

Now do me a favor, Please re read the above until you realize that you just described a device running iPhone OS! This is what amazes me about people dissing iPhone OS, they swear it is unacceptable and then go on to describe a device that might as well be iPhone OS.

You will not be creating any hackintishes for this device because it is going to be difficult to duplicate the device. In any event you gave clearly indicated that you have in mind a device of a different genre than this tablet. I don't know why either as you clearly want an iPhone OS tablet but just don't realize it.

Dave

Well Dave - thanks for calling me ignorant, which is why I don't normally post here - too many kids.

As for your suggestions about how I change how I think about things, you clearly didn't understand what I said.

I have no interest at all in iPhone versions of Word, Mail, or whatever other mobile versions of these apps people would come up with. If I am on a ten-inch screen I want to use the full versions of these apps. And I want Dropbox syncing those documents immediately.

I know damn well what the iPhone OS is and what it is capable of, and I don't WANT it on a 10" tablet. I want everything that is in OSX (Time Machine, etc.).

What I described is NOT an iPhone OS running on a Tablet.

iPhone OS on a tablet is a deal killer for me - you can try and reframe it all you want, but it won't do everything I want it to do with the iPhone OS (and it is a different OS, with different APIs than OSX, no matter what you say.)

I've been thinking about what this could be used for, and I really think they will be aiming it at the home entertainment/media center market. Here is an idea: what if this is the replacement for the AppleTV? The could provide a smaller, AppleTV-like device with no hard drive to connect to the TV and stereo, put a decent size HD in the tablet, and stream everything from the tablet to the TV. The could also potentially have DVR and SlingBox-type capabilities to stream TV to the tablet.

People are hugely interested in being able to watch anything they want, whenever they want, instantaneously on their home TV, and to do so without any hassle. Given how much people spend on cable TV subscriptions, they would certainly plop down a ton of money of an Apple TV type device that actually delivered on those promises. The software and media licensing deals just aren't there yet though.

Tablets are appealing because they are rare and have the mystique of being a rare high-tech gadget. As for the masses lusting after them... not so much.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stan_Timek

Absolutely right! I was a 1st gen purchaser of the Apple TV and love the little device. I'd love it more if it was able to grab more media assets from the web and play them through my HDTV. And I'm not talking about adding codecs to play the pirated material our in the wild rather allow Hulu, NetFlix, etc. to play back with Apple's UI ease.

Yes, Apple will need to loosen it's grip on the content for AppleTV in order for it to be successful. It needs to be able to play the content I already [legally] own without hacks and time consuming transcoding, and it needs to be able to directly access more online content.

Keeping in mind my limited savings, I guess I am going to drop the idea of getting the new iPods due in September and rather wait for the tablet. Looks like I will also need to adapt my savings cycle according to the June/September Apple launches!

That's the problem called Apple addiction. You buy one product, and you get addicted to the whole product range!